I wonder if any of the pro-gay marriage bloggers would support a change in Israel's legal system to allow civil marriage in Israel? At present persons of different religions and opposite sexes cannot get married to one another in Israel because marriage is controlled by the religious "authorities."
Actually, I'd be surprised if there are many pro-gay marriage bloggers who wouldn't support civil marriage in Israel -- assuming they were asked. At any rate, here's one who says: absolutely! And not just support, advocate! It's way overdue.
But. I need to insert my usual caveat here that this is a purely speculative exercise because I'm not an Israeli, I don't live in Israel and I try not to tell other people how to conduct their affairs. Nevertheless, it's my impression that there is overwhelming popular support for the idea.
I also need to add, in the context of Diane's further reference to the issue of civil marriage here, that I don't necessarily advocate or even support the abolition of Israel's Orthodox monopoly on Jewish religious marriage right now. And I do recognize that there are potential problems that the institution of civil marriage in Israel could cause. I'll explain, but not in the detail I had originally intended. This post was getting way too long and way too boring. Here's the abbreviated version.
Israel is a democracy, but it has a state religion and an officially recognized religious authority. Because it's a Jewish state, because it's the Jewish State, that authority is represented by rabbis.
The various liberalizing "movements" that are so integral to the American Jewish community have never really caught on in Israel, though. While most Israeli Jews aren't Orthodox, they're also not Reform, Conservative or Reconstructionist. And many secular as well as religious Israelis tend to consider those strains to be a Diaspora phenomenon, an attempt to "fit in" better in gentile society, and not worthy of much attention or respect.
So I don't get too riled up about Israel's recognition of the Orthodox rabbinate as the sole authority over Jewish religious matters in the Jewish State. When and if there's sufficient interest in a more indigenous liberal interpretation of Judaism in Israel, viable political parties will arise that reflect that interest and they'll hopefully challenge the Orthodox hegemony over religious affairs. They'll have a consituency and they'll have the power to make changes. And if they don't, I'll have something to say about it then.
In the meantime, there is a secular constituency whose needs are largely being ignored in this respect. So I do get riled up about Orthodox hegemony over secular affairs in general and civil marriage in particular. Diane has pointed out a number of the contortions and/or hypocricies Israelis have to go through to marry. Imshin has discussed this as well. It's not a good situation for anyone and it promotes resentment and distrust.
Advocates of civil marriage need to acknowledge, though, that its implementation has the potential to cause a rift in Israeli society. The threat is that, without the documentation supplied by the Orthodox Rabbinate to religiously married couples, the children of these civil marriages and their descendants will be considered off-limits as marriage partners to those who wish to remain within the confines of traditional Judaism.
Is this a real threat? Well, yes, it is, and it's one that isn't taken seriously enough by those who simply say "who cares?" A lot of people do care. But the fact is that there already is such a rift as a result of the thousands of Jews who have been converted or married outside of Israel by non-Orthodox rabbis. In fact, there have been such rifts almost as long as there have been Jews. It's nothing new. We adjust.
This five year-old editorial in the Jerusalem Post put it well.
There is no denying the danger that, through differing approaches towards marriage and conversion, the Jewish people will split into different groups whose members cannot marry each other, or who do not regard one another as Jews. The question is whether this problem can or should be addressed by continuing the existing legislated monopoly of the Orthodox Chief Rabbinate.
The problem of differing Jewish streams not recognizing each other is certainly not a new one - it is discussed in the Talmud in the context of the bitter disputes between the houses of Hillel and Shammai. Though the Talmud reports different versions of how this conflict was resolved, one version was that it was not - but each side recognized "intermarriages" with the other for the sake of the unity of the Jewish people.
The Post seemed to be advocating opening up the sphere of officially recognized religious authority equally to all the various "movements" within Judaism. As I said above, I don't agree. But civil marriage? Yes.
This is the "abbreviated version" you say?? Uh, yeah. It really is.
